Having discussed the inferentially connected nature of word-based knowledge in the previous post, we discussed the Kālāma Sutta in this post. The Kālāma Sutta is important because the Buddha offers his opinion on the usefulness of word-based knowledge in the search for an unchanging Truth.
Kālāma Sutta (Chinese: 卡拉瑪經), also known as Kesamutti Sūtra, “is a discourse of the Buddha contained in the Aṅguttara Nikaya (Chinese: 增一阿含經) of the Tripiṭaka (Chinese: 三藏經).”
On the day that Buddha passed the village of Kesaputta, he was greeted by its inhabitants, a clan called the Kalamans. While the Kalamans were very happy to see Buddha, they were also eager to ask him for advice on a dilemma they faced when other gurus visited. They asked Buddha, “Many wandering holy men and ascetics pass through, expounding their teachings and criticizing the teachings of others. So whose teachings should we follow?”
In other words, the Kalamans wanted to know how to judge the holy men and ascetics who came to preach to them. They wanted to know whose teaching they could believe in. Their dilemma was that not only did the gurus’ teachings vary, but they also criticized each other. By asking the Buddha whose teachings they should follow, the Kalamans sought advice on how to identify gurus whose teachings remained unchanged, so that they could have faith in them.
As discussed in Post 6, Citta, a quiescent mentality, is the Ultimate Reality and Truth in the cosmos. Citta is the Ultimate Reality and Truth because, without fluctuations, the “realness” of its reality and the “truthness” of its truth can never change. Therefore, if the Kalamans were looking for a guru whose teaching never changes, they would have to look for someone who must have understood Citta before they could teach it.
With his criterion established, Buddha gave the Kalamans the following ten instructions for evaluating the holy men and ascetics who came to preach to them.
These ten instructions are (Pali expression in parentheses):
1) Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing (anussava);
2) nor upon tradition (paramparā);
3) nor upon rumor (itikirā);
4) nor upon what is in a scripture (piṭaka-sampadāna);
5) nor upon surmise (takka-hetu);
6) nor axioms (naya-hetu);
7) nor upon specious reasoning (ākāra-parivitakka);
8) nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over (diṭṭhi-nijjhān-akkh-antiyā);
9) nor upon another’s seeming ability (bhabba-rūpatāya);
10) nor upon consideration, “The monk is our teacher” (“samaṇo no garū).
By asking the Kalamans to “do not go upon” these sources, Buddha made it very clear to the Kalamas that they should not rely on those gurus or ascetics whose knowledge “has been acquired by repeated hearing,” came from “tradition,” “rumor,” “scripture,” “surmise,” “axiom,” “specious reasoning,” “bias,” “seeming ability,“ or “teacher.“
A careful examination of the list reveals that all ten items are methods of receiving information from “others” through word-based knowledge, whether verbal or written. The point Buddha wanted to make was obvious: he wanted to impress on the Kalamans that if they wanted to learn the unchanging Truth, learning from someone whose knowledge came from others’ word-based knowledge would not lead them to it. If they wanted to know about the unchanging Truth, they could either learn it directly by realizing it personally or indirectly from someone who had realized it personally. If they wanted to rely on others to teach them, the person must have personally realized what he taught, but never from someone who had not personally realized it.
In fact, Buddha spoke from his own experience. As discussed in Post 2, the two gurus he studied under before his enlightenment, Alara Kālāma and Udraka Ramaputra, taught the Buddha what they never realized personally.
After studying under his first guru, Alara Kālāma, for a while, Buddha realized that, like the other students, he only recited the yogi’s doctrine while proclaiming that they understood his teachings. According to author Pankaj Mishra of An End to Suffering, “he began to think that ‘Kālāma only has faith in his teaching and does not proclaim, “I myself know, realize, and take upon myself this teaching, abiding in it.‘”
The future Buddha decided to confront Kālāma, “How far have you yourself realized this teaching by direct knowledge?“ In response, Kālāma taught him about the Sphere of Nothingness. Soon after practicing, Buddha realized the state of the Sphere of Nothingness and could abide in it. Impressed, Kālāma invited Buddha to join the hermitage as a co-teacher. However, Buddha was not yet satisfied and turned down the offer because the Sphere of Nothingness “does not lead to revulsion, dispassion, cessation, calm, knowledge, awakening, and Nibbana.”
Next, the future Buddha went to another guru called Udraka Ramaputra. This time, the guru told him about the Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception. Again, the Buddha could quickly grasp the teachings and abide by them. Once again, Udraka Ramaputra offered him a leadership position in his hermitage, which his student also declined. He left the second guru for the same reason as before.
According to author Pankaj Mishra, Buddha felt that the meditation these gurus taught, “no matter how deep,“ was “temporary, comfortable abiding, in the here and now.“ However, “one emerges from them, even after a long session, essentially unchanged.“ These states were “without a corresponding moral and intellectual development, they by themselves did not end suffering.
The experience with the gurus also makes Buddha realize “that mere faith in what the guru says isn’t enough and that you have to realize and verify it through your own experience.“
Ultimately, this was the message Buddha wanted to impress on the Kalamas: to know the unchanging Truth, “you have to realize and verify it through your own experience.”
Moreover, Buddha adhered to his beliefs. He did not start teaching until he had grasped the unchanging Truth. Shakyamuni Buddha chose not to begin teaching until after his enlightenment, when he had become a Tathagata and encompassed “all objects of knowledge,“ which includes Citta, the only unchanging Truth in the cosmos.
It is essential to know that, among the ten items for the Kalamans not to rely on, “teacher” is one of them. That, of course, includes the Buddha, who is a teacher. Of course, Buddha followed his own advice and asked his followers to go beyond what he taught them using an inferential, word-based methodology. When his followers had learned enough and were ready to pursue the unchanging Truth, the Buddha instructed them to relinquish the word-based knowledge they had acquired from him so they could complete their remaining journeys personally, seeking the unchanging Truth through direct perception. The message was delivered in the Diamond Sutra through the Parable of the Raft.
Diamond Sutra (Chinese: 金剛般若波羅蜜多經/金剛經) is “a Mahāyāna (Buddhist) sutra from the genre of Prajñāpāramitā (perfection of wisdom) sutras. Translated into a variety of languages over a broad geographic range, the Diamond Sūtra is one of the most influential Mahāyāna sutras in East Asia, and it is particularly prominent within the Chan (or Zen) tradition, along with the Heart Sutra.”
In the Diamond Sutra, Buddha instructs the bhiksu (Sanskrit, commonly translated into English as a Buddhist monk, Chinese: 比丘) as follows:
“You bhiksus should understand my teachings as the Parable of the Raft: even Buddha Dharma must be relinquished, let alone the non-Buddha dharmas (Chinese: 如等比丘, 知我說法, 如筏諭者, 法尚應捨, 何況非法).“
The parable of the raft involved a person using a raft to cross a river. Once he and the raft were on the other side, he wondered whether he should continue the journey on land with or without the raft. Buddha suggested that he should continue without the raft.
The raft is a metaphor for Buddhist teachings. Just as the rafters who had reached the shore were ready to change course, Buddha wanted his followers to know that when they had learned enough from his word-based doctrines, they must change course by first letting go of them (Buddha Dharma). Only after relinquishing what they had learned from the Buddha could they be free mentally to embark on their own journeys to perceive the unchanging Truth directly, as the Buddha did.
Again, Buddha practiced what he advised his followers. By the time he sat down at the Bodhi Tree to meditate until he reached enlightenment, he had relinquished everything he had ever had: his princely life, the lessons from the gurus, and the harsh Jainistic asceticism. By letting go of his attachments to worldly possessions, Buddha’s journey to enlightenment became easier.
That was also why, as discussed in the Post, In Memory and Honor of a Kalyanamitra, during their first encounter, Master Zhang Jia (Chinese: 章嘉大師) told Master Jing Kong that “seeing through, letting go (Chinese: 看破，放下)“ is the principle behind all Buddhist cultivations. In acquiring knowledge about the unchanging Truth of nature, it is better to relinquish all personal attachments and maintain a hate-free, malice-free, undefiled, and purified mind to make enlightenment easier.
Without question, Buddhism is the only education where a teacher asks his students to relinquish his teachings before graduating.
In the next post, we will discuss direct perception, the path to enlightenment.
(If you like this post, please like it on our Facebook page and share. Thank you.)
